OCR Text |
Show Western Resources New public land grazing policy By Helene C. Monberg 11B this Administration, we are iriji0n-makers...Our first priority will m keep good (public range) land " 0ing bad." Director Robert F. "L) Burford, of the Bureau of Land dement, at Western Governors' Terence, 9-1C-81. . Washington-The Bureau of Land Mgement (BLM) is between a rock j a hard place on its new grazing Coder two proposed policy directives I out to BLM top officials in recent sMths, BLM Director Robert F. Bur-y Bur-y proposes that holders of grazing jlson BLM lands "will maintain" j their own expense "structural im-vcments im-vcments constructed or installed rjnarily to benefit livestock grazing." gx would include fences, wells, cat-guards. cat-guards. Here are sharp differences within 0 itself over this policy on grounds ial it gives livestockmen a vested -At in public land on which they hold j year grazing permits, Western Jesources Wrap up (WRW) has been ii by BLM sources. Particularly on Ill's range staff, they said. Bis proposed new policy has been shed hard by Bill Swan of the Na-jnal Na-jnal Cattlemen's Association and by Frank DuBois, deputy assistant jcretary of Interior for land and water sources, who served on a task force j rangeland policy and also as an advisor ad-visor on rangeland policy to Gov. Bruce Xing, D-N.M., prior to his tour of duty at the Interior Department, accor-iig accor-iig to BLM sources. Other user groups on public lands are ,ary of this new policy, Charles illison of the Natural Resources Mense Council told WRW on Nov. 10. Uvestockmen always want to get a 7, -lake in the public lands. We think it ;i .oild be a mistake to surrender I;, canagement of public lands to itestockmen," Callison said. OTHER CRITICS , The task force on rangeland policy (- a which DuBois served with eight i; .to technical experts made a report 1 the subcommittee on range resource isnagement of the Naitonal Gover- ... :ors' Association (NGA) which was I' -ghly critical of the use of range im-p im-p movement funds for uses other than ac-a ac-a al on the ground rehabilitation, pro-'ection pro-'ection and improvements of the public a me subcommittee was co-chaired by 1 '-' aforementioned Gov. Bruce King of I ' Jew Mexico and by Gov. John V. -vans, D-Idaho, and the task force sported to it on May 20, 1981. The task i e was highly critical of BLM's ad-p ad-p ;'' "nistrative uses of range improve-r; improve-r; i "nt funds. It recommended to the nil 'M range management subcommit-is subcommit-is i ! that the BLM director issue in-r. in-r. ructions prohibiting the use of such t: itds for salaries, overhead, ad-I ad-I V "Jastrative costs, rent, environmental t:' 'sments or the administration of p i 1971 Wild Horse and Burro Act. The r: ,'orce also recommended that the w : director require that all range imminent im-minent funds "be expended for 'al range improvements on the ftjjid." the Natural Resources Defense was concerned that not enough ey would be spent by the BLM rtor for environmental impact ments (EIS) under the new policy. it : lr the proposed new rangeland l !' 1 gement policy which Burford sent tf 1 .2 BLM officials on July 2, he pro-7 pro-7 at grazing allotments fall into i!' '""Tories: those in good condi-if condi-if l,(Cate8ory M); those on which is major potential to improve the c.'1 ? now n fair to poor condition S1-' v'5V l) and those with limited . lal for improvement (Category V (Si!Cally' 01(5 Plar is to put most of is.. : money on the range classified in , ;ory I, and to put very little, if ' : m n Cate80rv C or Category M. .'m told the Western Governors V lslfnce meeting at Jackson, Wyo., vyi J Y' idea is to provide for mana8ernent of grazing ;T i -it r-Out on the range, we call .,, .'mg the biggest bang for the i' 'I it ?rPrate boardrooms, they ,af 1 Kihlu hl8hest return to the 0 lder,- Burford said. . emen"tion of the 'selective frf" iement' Plicy should also W Z? EIS process. We will no DnT Production inventories W f0rage allcations before .veloped a land use plan and an EIS. abtCiPa'e this chan8e alone could . 18 months from the four '"5lfii! 8re currently spending in nan EIS" Burford told the dt), rnors' Burford als0 EIS BLM Planned to shirttail tlj.1purocess when he appeared oo i r0US Public L8" Subcom-ReaaL Subcom-ReaaL 27 to discuss the revised H, Nanbudet for his agency. tak' Resources Defense "linin 8 dim view of anv :&IM7 f EIS Process in the grazing policy. In a letter to Burford dated Aug. 5, a Council Attorney, At-torney, Johanna H. Wald, said the new policy would not be "very useful" in improving im-proving the Western range. On the contrary, con-trary, she said, the new policy guidelines do not conform with a requirement re-quirement that the U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia imposed on BLM to prepare EIS's as a result of a Council suit against the agency in 1977. The court ordered BLM to prepare separate EIS's on 144 grazing areas covering 170 million acres of public land in the West, under a final order entered on April 14, 1978. The court ordered all of the EIS's to be site specific and all to be completed by 1988. ON COLLISION COURSE The BLM and the Council appear to be on a collision course. Burford stated in July when he released the proposed new rangeland management policy that BLM planned to meet the timetable set by the court, but it would also "streamline costly and time consuming procedures for writing EIS's" for public land grazing in the West. Council Attorney Wald said on Aug. 5 if BLM adopted the proposed policy, the Council Coun-cil would go back to court to ask it to rule the procedure "will not satisfy the judgment of the Court in Natural Resources Defense Council vs. Morton." Mor-ton." The Council threatened to sue BLM on its new policy. Asked if he were concerned about another suit being brought by the Council Coun-cil against BLM due to the new policy, Burford told WRW in an interview on Nov. 6, "No. I can't let the threat of a suit deter my actions." Burford is the first livestockman to head BLM. He said he did not come here from his Western Colorado ranch in Mesa County Coun-ty "to play with paper clips," or to carry on a policy of "paralysis by analysis." Ms. Wald was in Washington for two days last month to be briefed on BLM's , new grazing policy by Burford, Paul D. - Leonard, chief of the BLM division of rangeland resource, and other BLM officials. of-ficials. She did not tip her hand as to what the Council might do, Burford and Howard told WRW, altho it is rumored here that the Council might back off from a court challenge of the new guidelines. Not true, Callison of the Council told WRW on Nov. 10. "We have not changed our Aug. 5. position." WRW asked BLM to summarize the current situation regarding its policy guidelines and grazing regulations, which it did on Nov. 6. Comments received as a result of the proposed rangeland management plicy issued July 2 indicate that the final statement will be substantially changed. The Range Staff is in the process of making a decision as to whether they can prepare a final policy statement or will need to submit a second proposed statement. state-ment. In other words, the July 2 proposed propos-ed policy document might be completely complete-ly rewritten. Leonard told WRW on Nov. 10 he expected ex-pected the range staff would make a recommendation on a final or revised set of guidelines about Dec. 4 and a final or revised policy statement would be issued "late this year or early next year." BLM and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) have just completed a review of the grazing regulations issued on Jan. 19, just before the Carter ' Administration left office. Leonard expected ex-pected the proposed changes to be cleared by OBM this week and to be published in the Federal Register for 60 days of public comment "in a couple of weeks," he said on Nov. 10. They will be in line with the BLM policy guidelines BLM said. The BLM summary for WRW on Nov. 6 further stated that Burford had reached reach-ed a decision that "range betterment funds (8100 money) will not be used to fund environmental assessments, administrative ad-ministrative costs and other expenses incidental to rangeland management. These activities would be funded from other funds leaving range betterment funds to be used to finance on the ground improvements in grazing allotments." Range betterment funds come from grazing fees and are partially partial-ly earmarked for range betterment by law. Livestockmen like BLM's new policy, notably this one. Finally, BLM said, "Ranchers will be required to bear the cost of maintaining rangeland improvements from which they directly benefit." Burford told WRW on Nov. 6 such improvements must be cleared with "the BLM area manager" and that a livestockman must get a permit from BLM to put in such improvements. They should also be cleared by the local grazing and multiple use advisory boards, he said. Other groups, such as state game and fish departments, might also pay for specific improvements for wildlife, he said. BLM will pay for non structural improvements such as reseeding and brush control, and for reconstruction, he said. |